315 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

StingingVelvet wrote...

Huh?  The textures are low-res, it has nothing to do with the picture resolution.

Ehh no, there is certain relationship between the picture resolution and texture resolution. "Low res" isn't something that exists in vacuum, it's very much a result of how these two factors come together.

To make it simpler to explain, imagine the textured character is just a square with the texture on it. Then imagine this square fills entire screen.

Now, if the resolution of the texture is close to resolution of the screen, the game will be able to fill individual pixels of the screen with individual pixels of the texture. But if the resolution of the screen is much higher than that of the texture, the game will be forced to reuse each pixel of the texture multiple times, leading to the blocky "low res" look.

Essentially, the higher picture resolution is used, the higher resolution textures are needed to ensure things remain crips. And nearly 2k horizontal res is big -- take into account that character has front and back and both need to be textured, and at this resolution you can easily end with need for 4k textures, and even these can still wind up looking pixellated if camera gets to character close enough ... like during dialogue scenes.

Modifié par tmp7704, 02 octobre 2010 - 04:15 .

[sw33t nothings]

KLUME777 wrote...

I completeley agree with you. Have you ever played Killzone 2? It has the best graphics for a 1st person shooter ever (Discounting Crysis of coarse). The game sucks and looks bad though. Why? It looks boring as hell, there is no art at all. Just a bland, grey city, and a bland, brown desert. For the whole game (which is 6 hours long, i finished it quicker than MW2).

DAO had great artistic syle and, more importantly, diversity, something Killzone 2 lacked. DAO also had top notch cinimatic scenes. Im talking about camera angles and placements and  directing, that sorta thing. The cinematic director deserves a medal, really.

No, I haven't played Killzone 2. And by your description of it, I doubt I ever will. I'm actually not very big on shooters, to be honest. 

As for the rest, I know exactly what you mean.  It's nice to find common ground with forumites! 

[StingingVelvet]

tmp7704 wrote...

StingingVelvet wrote...

Huh?  The textures are low-res, it has nothing to do with the picture resolution.

Ehh no, there is certain relationship between the picture resolution and texture resolution. "Low res" isn't something that exists in vacuum, it's very much a result of how these two factors come together.

To make it simpler to explain, imagine the textured character is just a square with the texture on it. Then imagine this square fills entire screen.

Now, if the resolution of the texture is close to resolution of the screen, the game will be able to fill individual pixels of the screen with individual pixels of the texture. But if the resolution of the screen is much higher than that of the texture, the game will be forced to reuse each pixel of the texture multiple times, leading to the blocky "low res" look.

Essentially, the higher picture resolution is used, the higher resolution textures are needed to ensure things remain crips. And nearly 2k horizontal res is big -- take into account that character has front and back and both need to be textured, and at this resolution you can easily end with need for 4k textures, and even these can still wind up looking pixellated if camera gets to character close enough ... like during dialogue scenes.

Low-res textures are low-res textures regardless of resotion, was my point.  Yes, higher resolutions make them more obvious, but they're low-res either way.

[Brockololly]

slimgrin wrote...
I've never been able to get a clear answer  on just how long DA2 has been in development. They could have been working on it before DAO was released.

I know that  Laidlaw posted not too long ago in some thread where he mentioned that  the writers and artists were working on DA2 around March when the PC version was done, while they were porting Origins to the consoles. Ah ha- here is the thread I was thinking of.

StingingVelvet wrote...
Dragon Age 2 is a AAA game from a well-funded studio under the banner of EA, a mega-publisher.  It will sell for $60 and will have a massive ad campaign behind it.  Given all those factors there is no reason for it to look as low-res and lacking in detail as it does.

Priestly already said the game will look much better before it releases, so in a sense he agrees the current shots do not show the game at its best.  I'm not being weird here.

Right- in most of the interviews and such about DA2, the devs cite 3 things they're working on: the story, the combat and the graphics. I had no big issue with how Origins looked on the PC- I know it didn't look as good on the consoles. Most of my issues with Origins' graphics stem from the technical side of things, like the crummy lighting system not necessarily the artistic look of things. I think it all stems from what they're trying to achieve with the graphics- for better or worse, so long as they're trying to make things look realistic, its a AAA game from a big budget developer, so its going to be compared to other big budget games visuallly. And like people have mentioned, even a game in the same genre- The Witcher 2- which is going to be coming out at the same time as DA2 is arguably looking better so far.

Some of the more recent screens look very nice, yet even ones like this:

still look somewhat drab, with the kind of blurry background and ground textures and boring colors. Tossed in with the boring, drab Blightlands screens I 'm a bit worried DA2 will be yet another next gen game that thinks dark and gritty means everything needs to be a nice shade of brown and gray.

Modifié par Brockololly, 02 octobre 2010 - 07:05 .

[SirShreK]

Brockololly wrote...

slimgrin wrote...
I've never been able to get a clear answer  on just how long DA2 has been in development. They could have been working on it before DAO was released.

I know that  Laidlaw posted not too long ago in some thread where he mentioned that  the writers and artists were working on DA2 around March when the PC version was done, while they were porting Origins to the consoles. Ah ha- here is the thread I was thinking of.

StingingVelvet wrote...
Dragon Age 2 is a AAA game from a well-funded studio under the banner of EA, a mega-publisher.  It will sell for $60 and will have a massive ad campaign behind it.  Given all those factors there is no reason for it to look as low-res and lacking in detail as it does.

Priestly already said the game will look much better before it releases, so in a sense he agrees the current shots do not show the game at its best.  I'm not being weird here.

Right- in most of the interviews and such about DA2, the devs cite 3 things they're working on: the story, the combat and the graphics. I had no big issue with how Origins looked on the PC- I know it didn't look as good on the consoles. Most of my issues with Origins' graphics stem from the technical side of things, like the crummy lighting system not necessarily the artistic look of things. I think it all stems from what they're trying to achieve with the graphics- for better or worse, so long as they're trying to make things look realistic, its a AAA game from a big budget developer, so its going to be compared to other big budget games visuallly. And like people have mentioned, even a game in the same genre- The Witcher 2- which is going to be coming out at the same time as DA2 is arguably looking better so far.

Some of the more recent screens look very nice, yet even ones like this:

still look somewhat drab, with the kind of blurry background and ground textures and boring colors. Tossed in with the boring, drab Blightlands screens I 'm a bit worried DA2 will be yet another next gen game that thinks dark and gritty means everything needs to be a nice shade of brown and gray.

This is one of the screens I hdn't seen. Could you post a link to others similarly released recently?

[DAOME2FTW]

It's a beta or whatever you want to call it, it is in it's early stages, by the time it comes out i bet the graphics will be much better.

[TheMufflon]

DAOME2FTW wrote...

It's a beta or whatever you want to call it.

I want to call it an alpha.

[Brockololly]

SirShreK wrote...

This is one of the screens I hdn't seen. Could you post a link to others similarly released recently?

I got this one from Occam's stickied thread....although it would seem the link to this particular screen is broken on Occam's thread now.

[John Epler]

As someone who spends 8-12 hours a day looking at our level art, I can tell you that there's a lot of variety in look. Not every area looks the same, and our art team has become quite skilled at using the entire palette. Colours tell a story too, and I've always felt that our level art makes my job easier - I don't have to have as much going on in a scene when the level around it is interesting and uses a colour scheme that supports the visual storytelling.



I've yet to finish my first coffee of the day, though, so I might be mildly incomprehensible right now.

[SirShreK]

JohnEpler wrote...

As someone who spends 8-12 hours a day looking at our level art, I can tell you that there's a lot of variety in look. Not every area looks the same, and our art team has become quite skilled at using the entire palette. Colours tell a story too, and I've always felt that our level art makes my job easier - I don't have to have as much going on in a scene when the level around it is interesting and uses a colour scheme that supports the visual storytelling.

I've yet to finish my first coffee of the day, though, so I might be mildly incomprehensible right now.

Hmm... I hope the mongeese (???) are busy....

[Bryy_Miller]

TheMufflon wrote...

DAOME2FTW wrote...

It's a beta or whatever you want to call it.

I want to call it an alpha.

Considering we are five months out, I'd say beta (but then again, I am unemployed and not a Video Game-Thing Major).

[SirOccam]

Brockololly wrote...

SirShreK wrote...

This is one of the screens I hdn't seen. Could you post a link to others similarly released recently?

I got this one from Occam's stickied thread....although it would seem the link to this particular screen is broken on Occam's thread now.

Fixed, thanks.

[John Epler]

SirShreK wrote...

JohnEpler wrote...

As someone who spends 8-12 hours a day looking at our level art, I can tell you that there's a lot of variety in look. Not every area looks the same, and our art team has become quite skilled at using the entire palette. Colours tell a story too, and I've always felt that our level art makes my job easier - I don't have to have as much going on in a scene when the level around it is interesting and uses a colour scheme that supports the visual storytelling.

I've yet to finish my first coffee of the day, though, so I might be mildly incomprehensible right now.

Hmm... I hope the mongeese (???) are busy....

Well, I'm at work on a Saturday, so fairly busy

[AtreiyaN7]

sw33t nothings wrote...

 Maybe it's because I'm one of those crazy artists, but I seem to have a different view on graphics then most of my gamer friends. I don't nitpick about the textures and the res as long as the overall image 'works'. I'm more of a fan of graphics that evoke emotions and give a sense of atmosphere then who has the best rendering. Composition, style choices, colouring and I'll say it again just because it's that important- composition! From what I've seen of the DA2 screens so far, they have very dynamic compositions which I think will be very evocative and look fantastic in motion. 

I'm happily optimistic. I liked DA:Os graphics, but I openly welcome improvement, which I think there will be, since they're more comfortable with the engine and have played around and tweaked it. 

I also feel that video games being a fluid medium, that is, one with motion and movement, it's not exactly fair to judge it's visual impact by stills alone. I'd take a game with sweeping vistas and cinematic angles over stationary photorealism any day. But that's just me 

I would agree with that. I've always been partial to Japanese and Chinese ink paintings, which obviously differ quite a bit from Western art. Some ink paintings can be just a few strokes, and it's the composition and the effective use of space that are more important than how detailed and realistic it is (not that it isn't nice to have details). If it works, and it's aesthetically pleasing overall, then I'll be fine with DA2's graphics. I'm not really looking for Crysis 2-level graphics in my RPG.

That being said, if a game is an FPS I'm certainly going to be more demanding if I have been promised amazing graphics. Even then, I'll make exceptions: Singularity was quite fun, but the textures aren't the greatest in the world. Addressing the post on "muddiness" in the DA2 screenshots:  I really think that compared to DA:O things do not look as muddy or dark, etc.

I saw one screenshot comparison in the apparently eternal, and annoying, argument over sword sizes, and the DA2 screenshot was much brighter and had more color to it than the DA:O screenshot. Would high-res textures in everything be nice? Yes, they would. However, it really isn't something that bothers me all that much if it's not perfect. *shrug* I do expect an improvement over DA:O, but we'll need more screenshots later on to see how that's going - heh.

[congealeddgtllvr]

 I actually really like the muted color palette I'm seeing here.  I liked that about Origins too.  It made it so that when you got to a place that stood out, like the Urn of Sacred Ashes temple or the Circle Tower for example, you felt you had arrived at someplace really special and otherworldly.  If every place you visited had over the top fantasy colors with unicorns shooting rainbows out of their butts then no place would feel special.  It would be a shame if DA2 went that route in order to try to be more epic.  So many games do that these days.  I feel the same way about the armor and weapons and stuff.  

I think it's looking good!  I'm sure the textures will look a little more polished before release.  

[StingingVelvet]

Brockololly wrote...

Some of the more recent screens look very nice, yet even ones like this:

still look somewhat drab, with the kind of blurry background and ground textures and boring colors. Tossed in with the boring, drab Blightlands screens I 'm a bit worried DA2 will be yet another next gen game that thinks dark and gritty means everything needs to be a nice shade of brown and gray.

It certainly looks nicer than the shot I opened the thread with, but as you say it looks drab.  The floor and rocks look like fuzzy textures that lack detail and the whole scene looks to lack design.

It is better though, I hope we see even more improvement before release.

[Lumikki]

DAO enviroment graphics was in most of the places like puke from sewers, only few places actually looked good. Characters was okey, but even there was alot of improvement possibilities.

[StingingVelvet]

JohnEpler wrote...

As someone who spends 8-12 hours a day looking at our level art, I can tell you that there's a lot of variety in look. Not every area looks the same, and our art team has become quite skilled at using the entire palette. Colours tell a story too, and I've always felt that our level art makes my job easier - I don't have to have as much going on in a scene when the level around it is interesting and uses a colour scheme that supports the visual storytelling.

It's amazing how many games pick one color style and stick to it, rather than vary it by area.  Glad to hear you guys are using a lot of variety.

[Dave of Canada]

StingingVelvet wrote...

It's amazing how many games pick one color style and stick to it, rather than vary it by area.  Glad to hear you guys are using a lot of variety.

Haven't you heard? Real is brown.

[StingingVelvet]

Just to clear things up I installed Lost Planet and took a new pic to show it is gameplay, not a movie. I will replace the pic in the OP.

[Brockololly]

Thats good to hear that not everything is boring brown and bland. I guess another area I'd like to see improved graphically in DA2 would be the actual environments or the landscapes though too. I think Matt Goldman mentioned in some interview they were working on more epic vistas and stuff like that yet at the same time you hear how they're going for a more austere look with the backgrounds to focus on the characters.

Part of my issue in Origins was that all the time the skies are overcast and it looks like its always smoggy or hazy out. And its like everything is drenched in fog with hardly any draw distance to see out beyond in the environments.

Like in these early screens from DA2:



I don't know if the first one is supposed to be foggy or not, but thats the sort of thing that always bugged me in Origins. I get that they want atmospheric perspective and all with less detail the farther back you go, but its like most areas were like that.

At least it looks like we've got a nicer looking sky in the second pic- although the textures on the ground especially are a bit rough- but these were pretty early screens.

I'd just love it if the landscapes matched the lighting and mood that they always get in the concept art. Even if that meant having some digitally drawn in landscapes for some epic looking vistas, that would be excellent. The awesome landscapes and unique environments is one reason Baldur's Gate 2 was and still is one of my favorite RPGs- the characters might not have aged well graphically, but the environments there are still lovely to look at.

Modifié par Brockololly, 02 octobre 2010 - 08:50 .

[SirShreK]

Brockololly wrote...

Thats good to hear that not everything is boring brown and bland. I guess another area I'd like to see improved graphically in DA2 would be the actual environments or the landscapes though too. I think Matt Goldman mentioned in some interview they were working on more epic vistas and stuff like that yet at the same time you hear how they're going for a more austere look with the backgrounds to focus on the characters.

Part of my issue in Origins was that all the time the skies are overcast and it looks like its always smoggy or hazy out. And its like everything is drenched in fog with hardly any draw distance to see out beyond in the environments.

Like in these early screens from DA2:



I don't know if the first one is supposed to be foggy or not, but thats the sort of thing that always bugged me in Origins. I get that they want atmospheric perspective and all with less detail the farther back you go, but its like most areas were like that.

At least it looks like we've got a nicer looking sky in the second pic- although the textures on the ground especially are a bit rough- but these were pretty early screens.

I'd just love it if the landscapes matched the lighting and mood that they always get in the concept art. Even if that meant having some digitally drawn in landscapes for some epic looking vistas, that would be excellent. The awesome landscapes and unique environments is one reason Baldur's Gate 2 was and still is one of my favorite RPGs- the characters might not have aged well graphically, but the environments there are still lovely to look at.

Hmm...

These reminded me of TES: Oblivion. It was a game in 2007.

[thegreateski]

Oblivion was so damn pretty that people were complaining about it.

[AlexXIV]

thegreateski wrote...

Oblivion was so damn pretty that people were complaining about it.

Agree, nothing wrong with Oblivion graphic. If DA2 even gets close to that I am impressed.